From: Magnus Berg (McMagnus@home.se)
Date: Tue Jan 07 2003 - 12:24:19 GMT
Hi Scott
> Biology and zoology *as currently practiced* are not explaining the
> biological level. They can only describe the first level processes that
> occur in second level entities. To claim otherwise is to espouse
> reductionism.
A good point, but I'm not sure you're entirely correct. I could be wrong
but doesn't zoologists sometimes describe animal behaviour, for example
mating rituals, in terms of what they like or dislike. This is a
description of the second level and as such *not* second level, but that
goes for descriptions of first level processes as well.
And isn't various mosquito repellent stuff based on some substance that
mosquitos simply dislike. I'd say that makes good use of second level
values.
> I don't know what a true second-level science would be (I have hopes of
> Rupert Sheldrake's morphogenesis, but recognize that it is still largely
> speculative).
Morpho-what? :) Sounds interesting. What is it?
Magnus
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Jan 07 2003 - 12:25:13 GMT